Rejection due to alleged use of AI

[mike74747]

Once again, my stories are being denied publication due to alleged AI use. Regardless of one's general opinion about the use of AI, this is annoying and frustrating for me because it's simply not true. I neither let an AI write for me nor do I use it for proofreading. Does anyone know this problem and can give me tips on what to do to get my stories published? Thanks.

 

[Nynah]

There are a number of similar threads already in the Editor's Forum if you wanted to look there.

AwkwardMD has also offered her editing services with regards to AI rejection in her own thread if you wanted to avail yourself of those there.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Did you paste it into the submission field or upload a file? There is some limited evidence to suggest that one works better than the other in avoiding false AI rejections.

 

[Britva415]

Did you paste it into the submission field or upload a file? There is some limited evidence to suggest that one works better than the other in avoiding false AI rejections.

Which?

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Which?

In discussing stories possibly rejected due to the use of Grammarly or similar, uploaded stories seem to pass, while pasted in the field stories don't. It's not conclusive, but it might be worth a try.

 

[OddLove]

Does anyone here know how to detect AI written stories? Cause I have no idea how I would know.

Is there clues? Like strange phasing?, inconsistency of some sort?, or something that gives it away?

 

[mike74747]

Zerogpt 2 my Text: 100% human. The whole KI-Shit is stupid!

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Did you paste it into the submission field or upload a file? There is some limited evidence to suggest that one works better than the other in avoiding false AI rejections.

No one really knows Laurel's process, but uploading a document instead of copy-pasting text should make a lot of difference. I write in Word, and I always upload a docx file instead of copy-pasting into the textbox. I'll show you a screenshot of one of my stories after clicking Properties and then Details.




Date created vs Last Saved, the number of revisions (which is basically how many times I pressed Save) , and Total editing time provide plenty of evidence that I didn't simply generate my story via an AI prompt.

Obviously, there is no guarantee that Laurel looks at this stuff, but I suspect she does, especially in borderline cases.

 

[Writer61]

No one really knows Laurel's process, but uploading a document instead of copy-pasting text should make a lot of difference. I write in Word, and I always upload a docx file instead of copy-pasting into the textbox. I'll show you a screenshot of one of my stories after clicking Properties and then Details.

View attachment 2551286


Date created vs Last Saved, the number of revisions (which is basically how many times I pressed Save) , and Total editing time provide plenty of evidence that I didn't simply generate my story via an AI prompt.

Obviously, there is no guarantee that Laurel looks at this stuff, but I suspect she does, especially in borderline cases.

That's an interesting thought.

 

[TheLobster]

Date created vs Last Saved, the number of revisions (which is basically how many times I pressed Save) , and Total editing time provide plenty of evidence that I didn't simply generate my story via an AI prompt.

We cannot know that for sure, but one wonders whether the site tracks how many times you've saved an online draft when you're not uploading a file. As a weak data point, I always do my final editing pass or two by reading the story in the preview; I have yet to get an AI rejection.

Maybe you have a higher chance to get scrutinized more thoroughly if you just click New Story, paste in your fully finished text, fill out the rest of the form, and submit w/o ever interacting with the online draft feature at all.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

No one really knows Laurel's process, but uploading a document instead of copy-pasting text should make a lot of difference. I write in Word, and I always upload a docx file instead of copy-pasting into the textbox. I'll show you a screenshot of one of my stories after clicking Properties and then Details.

View attachment 2551286


Date created vs Last Saved, the number of revisions (which is basically how many times I pressed Save) , and Total editing time provide plenty of evidence that I didn't simply generate my story via an AI prompt.

Obviously, there is no guarantee that Laurel looks at this stuff, but I suspect she does, especially in borderline cases.

Exactly. I have gone back through many of the AI rejection threads and do not see one single instance where someone claims that an uploaded file got rejected versus all of those who pasted into the field on the submission form.

 

[Writer61]

Exactly. I have gone back through many of the AI rejection threads and do not see one single instance where someone claims that an uploaded file got rejected versus all of those who pasted into the field on the submission form.

I sometimes paste finished text into a new Word doc, which won't show a long editing history. Even with that, no AI rejections.

 

[alohadave]

All this speculation with no actual knowledge of how the process works.

In the past year, all my submissions have been pasted into the text field on the first time without saving and making changes.

You all are making inferences from random bits of information that may or may not meant anything.

 

[Gamblnluck]

Exactly. I have gone back through many of the AI rejection threads and do not see one single instance where someone claims that an uploaded file got rejected versus all of those who pasted into the field on the submission form.

I have never uploaded a file and after and not one of my 150 submissions has been rejected for AI. It may be the program figures an AI program would not write in that screwed up manner. Who knows.

 

[Gamblnluck]

I think I know why the original poster Mike74747 had his stories rejected. I looked at his profile to see if his writing style might give a clue.. His 8 published stories are in German. If he is using a translator program to change to English, that might be the problem.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

All this speculation with no actual knowledge of how the process works.

True. I assume your work never raised any red flags. But for those whose work does raise Laurel's suspicions, bits of evidence such as what I showed might help. Or maybe they don't, I don't know for sure. What is certain is that there is no harm in trying to upload a story that way, IF the story was previously rejected. It could help. It's worth a try at least.

 

[iwatchus]

Again, pure speculation, but I would be mildly surprised if everything wasn’t presented to Laurel in the final html view. That said, it is possible that one of the automated steps records something like that. But I have also seen recommendations to do each way to help avoid the ai curse

 

[yano2mch]

I'm asking questions in another thread of using AI, but not to write a story but help direct it in a RP style where i do writing and then it does some writing as a response, like a player and a DM with interactive storytelling.

I get the distinct feeling any amount of AI (or seemingly AI) will be enough for rejection.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I'm asking questions in another thread of using AI, but not to write a story but help direct it in a RP style where i do writing and then it does some writing as a response, like a player and a DM with interactive storytelling.

I get the distinct feeling any amount of AI (or seemingly AI) will be enough for rejection.

AI use story side is a big no.

If you're thinking of using it forum side (that is, in chat rooms) the site might not care, but I can't imagine chat users liking it much.

 

[yano2mch]

AI use story side is a big no.

Which defeats the point of signing up. I'm not having it generate stories wholecloth, more as a artificial RP partner like being on F-list but they are always online, always up for RP whatever you want, and willing to let you share their content. A RP partner helps me flesh the scene out to the interaction level i find i personally need to get past my innately perpetual writing block; I need regular interaction/feedback or i just can't write hardly at all.

If you're thinking of using it forum side (that is, in chat rooms) the site might not care, but I can't imagine chat users liking it much.

Don't see the point in doing those unless it's to auto-reply for specific types of questions for technical answers.

 

[FrancesScott]

All this speculation with no actual knowledge of how the process works.

In the past year, all my submissions have been pasted into the text field on the first time without saving and making changes.

You all are making inferences from random bits of information that may or may not meant anything.

This

 

[TheAlphabetGirl]

Does anyone here know how to detect AI written stories? Cause I have no idea how I would know.

Is there clues? Like strange phasing?, inconsistency of some sort?, or something that gives it away?

The biggest give away for me it is word perfect, no typo's, grammar issues etc. Or maybe in reverse, I can tell when it's human (at the moment as AI strives for perfection).

The second thing I noticed when experimenting with AI for editing (correctly typos and grammar) is that the AI (CHATGPT). started to rephrase stuff and then went on to finish my story (which I always leave on a cliff hanger) and it made me my stomach churn. Very cheesy for the type of content I write!

 

[SkyBubble]

Does anyone here know how to detect AI written stories? Cause I have no idea how I would know.

Is there clues? Like strange phasing?, inconsistency of some sort?, or something that gives it away?

For one thing, AI likes dashes.

 

[yano2mch]

For one thing, AI likes dashes.

Yeah, often as separators where commas or semi-colons would be. I see certain words used a little too much more, like 'ghosting' and 'hitches' when involved with breathing. A lot of little things. Though maybe I'm just hitting the edge of what the model can do as it gets stuck not quite able to navigate the scenario.